The Dude wrote:He'd be like the Trump on the D side, right? Uge early numbers, but no real chance

The clinic is one of three in Kansas that provide abortions. It opened in 2013 in the same building where Dr. George Tiller provided abortions before he was gunned down in 2009. Tiller's killer, Scott Roeder, said that he had chosen to obey "God's law" to save babies, after shooting Tiller while the doctor was serving as an usher in church.

pacino wrote:no one is saying she sent anything classified. what is being checked is if something that was sent should've been considered classified retroactively.

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Depends on what you think the probability of Hillary getting nailed on something and having to drop out.

drsmooth wrote:

The Dude wrote:you missed where i check my bags, but close

Here's what you missed while TSA was wanding your crotch (yes, I do know why you like airports, you weirdo):

Jerz knows that the die was cast on this Iran deal practically from the moment the negotiations began thanks to structural/procedural realities of our wondrous representative government. Obama never needed Congressional approval of this complex, conflicted, compromising, multi-nation-state deal; he just needed to avoid too much disapproval. Now that it's pretty sure he's done that, he's getting less disapproval.

I know that Jerz has known that. And he's made clear that he understands that. And he and I know that that makes anything Donald Trump, or Ted Cruz, or Bob Menendez, or anybody, a lot of gumflappery.

The frauds and desperados pursuing the Republican party nomination for POTUS are not as competent, not as capable, as Jerz is. Jerz would be a better candidate that all but maybe 2 of them. I would be much more comfortable entrusting the future of the US of A to him than to the imbecile Trump or some poopstain like Cruz.

So when I'm told "no thank you, in fact fuck you for calling the putative leaders of "my team" "children"", yes, I feel a bit miffed.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:no one is saying she sent anything classified. what is being checked is if something that was sent should've been considered classified retroactively.

That isn't true though. The intelligence community inspector general has already found a couple of emails in her account that contained information that was classified at the time the emails were sent. The emails were not marked as containing classified info, but the info is still classified marked or not. This is just from the tiny sample that has been looked at so far.

Like Merrill, the agency spokesman also said that the e-mails had not been marked as classified. According to federal rules, it is the responsibility of the sender of an e-mail to ensure it contains the proper classification designations.

Clinton was on the thread of the e-mails as other aides shared new information or joined in the discussion, and often did not reply, the officials said.

In April, following a New York Times report in March that first noted Clinton’s exclusive use of a private e-mail address during her time as secretary, State Department inspector general Steve Linick began an inquiry to look more deeply at the use of personal devices by Clinton and other previous secretaries. In early June, he expanded the inquiry to have his team read through hundreds of Clinton’s e-mails to check on the State process for releasing them. Linick asked the inspector general for the intelligence community, I. Charles “Chuck” McCullough III, to help because of his office’s expertise in classified records.

In mid-June, McCullough and Linick became concerned that State might be handling potentially classified information in a sloppy way. They discovered that classified information mentioned in one of Clinton’s e-mails had been released by the State Department to the public in May.
But the inspectors tussled with a top State Department official, Patrick Kennedy, who said the proper protocols were being followed to protect classified information.

State officials believed that McCullough’s office was over-classifying by deeming information sensitive even if it had been published in news articles or other public documents, according to two government officials. An agency spokesman, Alec Gerlach, said it was common for staffers around the world to learn information from open sources “that may also be independently learned through entirely separate means within the intelligence community.” He said State officials were working with intelligence agencies to review Clinton’s e-mails and to “clarify their findings and resolve whether, in fact, this material is classified.”